ArticleLung India : official organ of Indian Chest Society
Systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria (SIRS) and sepsis 3 criteria for assessing outcomes in sepsis: A prospective observational study.
Article in Lung India : official organ of Indian Chest Society. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development of an Explainable Machine Learning Model to Predict Mortality Risk in Sepsis Patients: Insights From a Real-World Clinical Data.Shock (Augusta, Ga.) · 2026Article
- Point-of-care LPS-induced TNF-α release testing for early sepsis risk stratification in the emergency department.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Observational
- PPARA ameliorates sepsis-induced myocardial injury via promoting macrophage M2 polarization by interacting with DUSP1.Regenerative therapy · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Sepsis is a major cause of death in hospitalised patients worldwide. Most studies for assessing outcomes in sepsis are from the western literature. Sparse data from Indian settings are available comparing the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) and quick SOFA (qSOFA) (sepsis 3 criteria) for assessing outcomes in sepsis. In this study, we aimed to compare the SIRS criteria and sepsis 3 criteria to assess disease outcome at day 28 (recovery/mortality) in a North Indian tertiary care teaching hospital. Methods: A prospective observational study was performed in the Department of Medicine from 2019 to early 2020. Patients admitted to the medical emergency with clinical suspicion of sepsis were included. Systemic inflammatory response syndrome, qSOFA and SOFA scores were calculated at the time of presentation to the hospital. Patients were followed through the course of their hospital stay. Results: Out of 149 patients, 139 were included in the analysis. Patients who died had significantly higher mean SOFA, qSOFA scores and mean change in SOFA score than patients who survived (P value <0.01). There was no statistical difference between recovery and deaths at similar SIRS scores. A 40.30% fatality rate was recorded. Systemic inflammatory response syndrome had low Area Under Curve (AUC) (0.47) with low sensitivity (76.8) and specificity (21.7). SOFA had the maximum AUC (0.68) compared to qSOFA (0.63) and SIRS (0.47). SOFA also had the maximum sensitivity (98.1) while the qSOFA score had the maximum specificity (84.3). Conclusion: SOFA and qSOFA scores had superior predictive ability as compared to the SIRS score in assessing mortality in sepsis patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.